Jump to content

Kuuner

Members
  • Content Count

    872
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kuuner

  1. So I'm assuming you couldn't do this more than once. Do what more than once? File a skinny BK? People do it all the time. Frequent Filers. What people miss is that there comes a point in time, some times, where while the BK is filed, and may be valid, the filer could lose the right of automatic stay if they file multiple times or, within a certain time frame from a previous filing.
  2. Against the entity doing the foreclosure. You would have to have a compelling reason for an ex parte motion in my opinion. If you are filing an emergency hearing to stay a foreclosure, without a reason to do so, my opinion would be that you would be in hot water, spend lots of money, and fail on the endeavor. The question was though, how could a foreclosure be stalled. That's one way to do it.
  3. Unless you pay the amount due, the only thing that slows/stops a foreclosure sale, (outside of a lawsuit) is a bankruptcy filing. You can file a bankruptcy with one piece of paper almost but, you'll get a notice to dismiss for not filing a complete package, the day you file with the hearing on the BK and motion to dismiss about 30-45 days after filing.
  4. There are some misnomers to your post, like "Tacking on fees", and other things that should be clarified. No one "Tacks on fees" just because. If you are late on your payment, you may get a late fee, which you agreed to when you took the loan out. If you end up being sued, you will be required to pay the attorney or, if you are not in a judicial state, the trustee, for the foreclosure. It's not a punitive measure but rather, what you agreed to when the loan originated. Also, if your attorney actually told you everything freezes, they were wrong. It doesn't freeze. If you are not contractually current during the BK, your credit report will reflect that. If you were delinquent when you filed, a portion of your delinquent amount due is paid over time. Even if you made your current payment on time, your "arrears" are paid over time with the theory that in five years, you are caught up so, if you were not completely current with both your pre and post petition payments, your credit will reflect that. It might suck. It might not be fair. It might conflict with what your attorney told you but it is what it is. Some on this board do not agree with my position and that's fine. No one has been able to provide any statute or code stating credit reporting stops while in BK. I've provided statute to the contrary in previous posts that you can look up. Filing BK stops all action, which by most definitions is, legal proceedings, collection efforts, etc. but, doesn't stop credit reporting until you are discharged. Your credit report should show a zero balance and should show IIB but again, if you are delinquent, while in a bankruptcy, your report will show you are delinquent. As CV stated, absent the BK, that's how it would show. With the BK, it will show the same, just with different status and action codes on the tradeline. okay just to clear up a few things our bankruptcy was paid back at 100%...we paid back every dime. she paid back our late mortgage first.. we had $650 taken from our checks a week to cover our current mortgage and the months we were behind...so the late months were paid back within 6-9 months... after that our other credit which was a huge hospital bill due to surgery started to be paid. And they did TACK on fees that should never have been added on in the first place. We were 2 months behind while paying them pmi which should have protected us in the event we did get behind. I know this because it was included in the paperwork sent to us after a class action lawsuit was filed and won against wells fargo.(we received a $1400 check in this settlement) there have been at least 3 other checks from lawsuits filed that we did receive regarding the practice they used against people. They moved entirely too quickly and proceeded against what the law states they can do. The late payments showed up 2 years AFTER our bk was started, before that she was paying on time. We paid her $37 a week to in addition to our bk payment just for her to make our current mortgage payment. This was suggested by our lawyer because they could take the payments out pretax.The original late payments were made current... she paid our current mortgage payments late when we paid her on time. I just want the lates taken off. we paid back everything and then some... this is the only negative thing on our credit and it just looks bad seeing it there. Well...sounds like you have all the answers and the proof. Maybe you should sue the trustee? you just said what everyone around us is saying.. that the fault lies with the trustee. I just really didn't want to have to pay another lawyer to try to sue the trustee..I'm probably going to have to look at a different lawyer though to look into what can be done. I can't believe that there isn't a way to have this updated or changed completely on my report. I will keep asking...maybe someone knows a way on getting lates removed without a court process. Thanks for your input☺ I was being sarcastic. The lender doesn't care who makes the payments, just when, so, if the trustee paid them late, a credit dispute isn't going to work. I'm confident the trustee will have a defensible argument. That said, we all make mistakes. Without knowing the details of your case or your plan, there was a plan hearing. There was a priority of claims and payments. The minute the plan was confirmed and the first payment was made, the onus was on you to ensure everything was going as you thought it should be going. If your trustee accounting showed differently, did you object when you noticed? Where you not given a trustee accounting? Did you ask for a trustee accounting? Were you monitoring your credit from the beginning? Your payments from the beginning? In one case I read, while there was a mistake, the debtor failed to speak up until it was too late. In re: Jose Noe Carmona, BAP No. CC-14-1380-TaPaKi, the Ninth Circuit BAP, it goes into detail. My take in reading the case was, it was the debtor's fault for not making sure creditor's were paid correctly.
  5. There are some misnomers to your post, like "Tacking on fees", and other things that should be clarified. No one "Tacks on fees" just because. If you are late on your payment, you may get a late fee, which you agreed to when you took the loan out. If you end up being sued, you will be required to pay the attorney or, if you are not in a judicial state, the trustee, for the foreclosure. It's not a punitive measure but rather, what you agreed to when the loan originated. Also, if your attorney actually told you everything freezes, they were wrong. It doesn't freeze. If you are not contractually current during the BK, your credit report will reflect that. If you were delinquent when you filed, a portion of your delinquent amount due is paid over time. Even if you made your current payment on time, your "arrears" are paid over time with the theory that in five years, you are caught up so, if you were not completely current with both your pre and post petition payments, your credit will reflect that. It might suck. It might not be fair. It might conflict with what your attorney told you but it is what it is. Some on this board do not agree with my position and that's fine. No one has been able to provide any statute or code stating credit reporting stops while in BK. I've provided statute to the contrary in previous posts that you can look up. Filing BK stops all action, which by most definitions is, legal proceedings, collection efforts, etc. but, doesn't stop credit reporting until you are discharged. Your credit report should show a zero balance and should show IIB but again, if you are delinquent, while in a bankruptcy, your report will show you are delinquent. As CV stated, absent the BK, that's how it would show. With the BK, it will show the same, just with different status and action codes on the tradeline. okay just to clear up a few things our bankruptcy was paid back at 100%...we paid back every dime. she paid back our late mortgage first.. we had $650 taken from our checks a week to cover our current mortgage and the months we were behind...so the late months were paid back within 6-9 months... after that our other credit which was a huge hospital bill due to surgery started to be paid. And they did TACK on fees that should never have been added on in the first place. We were 2 months behind while paying them pmi which should have protected us in the event we did get behind. I know this because it was included in the paperwork sent to us after a class action lawsuit was filed and won against wells fargo.(we received a $1400 check in this settlement) there have been at least 3 other checks from lawsuits filed that we did receive regarding the practice they used against people. They moved entirely too quickly and proceeded against what the law states they can do. The late payments showed up 2 years AFTER our bk was started, before that she was paying on time. We paid her $37 a week to in addition to our bk payment just for her to make our current mortgage payment. This was suggested by our lawyer because they could take the payments out pretax.The original late payments were made current... she paid our current mortgage payments late when we paid her on time. I just want the lates taken off. we paid back everything and then some... this is the only negative thing on our credit and it just looks bad seeing it there. Well...sounds like you have all the answers and the proof. Maybe you should sue the trustee?
  6. There are some misnomers to your post, like "Tacking on fees", and other things that should be clarified. No one "Tacks on fees" just because. If you are late on your payment, you may get a late fee, which you agreed to when you took the loan out. If you end up being sued, you will be required to pay the attorney or, if you are not in a judicial state, the trustee, for the foreclosure. It's not a punitive measure but rather, what you agreed to when the loan originated. Also, if your attorney actually told you everything freezes, they were wrong. It doesn't freeze. If you are not contractually current during the BK, your credit report will reflect that. If you were delinquent when you filed, a portion of your delinquent amount due is paid over time. Even if you made your current payment on time, your "arrears" are paid over time with the theory that in five years, you are caught up so, if you were not completely current with both your pre and post petition payments, your credit will reflect that. It might suck. It might not be fair. It might conflict with what your attorney told you but it is what it is. Some on this board do not agree with my position and that's fine. No one has been able to provide any statute or code stating credit reporting stops while in BK. I've provided statute to the contrary in previous posts that you can look up. Filing BK stops all action, which by most definitions is, legal proceedings, collection efforts, etc. but, doesn't stop credit reporting until you are discharged. Your credit report should show a zero balance and should show IIB but again, if you are delinquent, while in a bankruptcy, your report will show you are delinquent. As CV stated, absent the BK, that's how it would show. With the BK, it will show the same, just with different status and action codes on the tradeline.
  7. Walking away would create some excitement in your life. Short sale doesn't exist based on the numbers you gave. Deed in lieu would be difficult. Not impossible but, not probable. They have no incentive. I'd also say you are calculating your deficiency potentially short. I'm confident that $20K nut you are thinking you may get hit with, would be much higher than that if it went all the way to sale. Sell it and pay the difference in the short proceeds from payoff, out of pocket. It'd be much easier than having to do the same thing down the road but with destroyed credit. Don't be a victim to the banks in the future...(I'm hopeful no one put a gun to your head when you took the loan out).
  8. Deficiencies vary by state (Assuming there is a deficiency). A deficiency is when the lender/servicer/bank forecloses and nets less than the total debt owed. If you owe $200,000 and the lender forecloses at that amount, but the property is only worth $100,000, there is a good chance you will see a 1099 for $100,000. Again, depending on the state, that may be the end of it or, that may be the beginning. You won't see a 1099 necessarily if they are going to go after you for the balance, if they are allowed to do so by statute. I would be less concerned about what it says on your credit report than I would be with the financial impact of the foreclosure. What state are you in?
  9. There is that old saying...be careful what you wish for! Kidding but, the reality is, that is what you owe. What you are paying on isn't what you owe so, for them to include the deferred balance in the total balance, would be accurate in my opinion. Balance and payment amount are two different things so, if you are making a payment on one balance and the payment is sufficient to advance the due date and is equal to the modified contractual amount due, and they are reporting that payment status correctly, in my opinion, its all correct. You may have been getting the benefit of an incorrectly reported balance in the past and are now having an actual correct balance reporting.
  10. no, it's not just non judicial it's either or depending on the note, just like AZ Judicial Foreclosure The judicial process of foreclosure, which involves filing a lawsuit to obtain a court order to foreclose, is used when no power of sale is present in the mortgage or deed of trust. Generally, after the court declares a foreclosure, your home will be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Non-Judicial Foreclosure The non-judicial process of foreclosure is used when a power of sale clause exists in a mortgage or deed of trust. A "power of sale" clause is the clause in a deed of trust or mortgage, in which the borrower pre-authorizes the sale of property to pay off the balance on a loan in the event of the their default. In deeds of trust or mortgages where a power of sale exists, the power given to the lender to sell the property may be executed by the lender or their representative, typically referred to as the trustee. Regulations for this type of foreclosure process are outlined below in the "Power of Sale Foreclosure Guidelines". Ok you are correct not all are non-judicial but the VAST majority are there. Based on what OP has posted I would bet money it was a non-judicial foreclosure like most are there. well if they sent the sheriff out with an eviction notice, something went thru court. Yeah...could be just the eviction that went to court and not the foreclosure. if the foreclosure was judicial, you are still gonna use a sheriff for the eviction piece.
  11. If you have the money then it's more of a "What do you want to do" situation than, "What do you have to do". That's a good position to be in considering most people are not in that position of having options. If its a place your family knows as home, who cares if you make money, unless it's not a family home and all you care about is the money aspect. If that's the case, well, it's your decision. I'm sure you'll do a cost benefit analysis. I'm sure you've already considered the credit aspect. I'm sure you are considering the health impact this forced move may have on your ailing wife. Good luck with your decision.
  12. If you have six months redemption, it isn't to bring it current, it's to pay it off. I would beg borrower cheat lie and steal to do it if I were you. Also, The senior doesn't HAVE to be notified. They don't even care if they are as their lien survives. Whether you got the notice or knew or not, will not be important. What will be important is that the foreclosing entity has documentation they sent notice, not that you received notice. I can't see someone foreclosing in 2nd position with that tight of an equity position. While it sucks you were paying for five months to the senior, after you were foreclosed, I don't see anything improper. Someone has to pay the senior and if you weren't paying them, you'd be paying rent. If you weren't paying them, the junior that foreclosed would. It all sounds shady though, especially if the 1st and 2nd might be affiliated. I'd lawyer up to at least see if there is any connection.
  13. I can get a car loan. I have reasonable credit. Can you explain what frontend and backend ratios are? Maybe you have undeclared income and maybe your credit is good enough to get a non income verification loan and maybe I'm just missing it but it sounds like you are having cashflow problems. Getting a new car, with a new car loan sounds like that's only going to exacerbate the problem. I get that you need transportation and I get that your car took a dump but, is this the best solution? To go further into debt? Sounds like the margins are thin and my concern is adding more debt to the situation puts you in the position that one false move, one tenant not paying their rent on time, defaults you on potentially not one, but two large loans. As a person that manages a bank's portfolio, I see it all too often. No one wants to take the bus. No one wants to fix what they have or buy a beater. They buy a new car. Something happens. They default. They get the car repo'd. They get behind on their mortgage. They default. They try to refinance out of the default on their mortgage but the default on their car loan stops that from happening. They get desperate. They have equity but now can't get to it without selling. They try to go hard money but they find out hard money lenders won't (Can't) lend on owner occupied property, especially in Texas! They file BK last minute to save the house but then, they go back to beginning and realize, they don't have any income to fund the chapter 13 so they convert to a chapter 7 only to realize four months later, they get their discharge and a couple days after, get another sale notice from the lender. Unless thousands just fell into their hands, the usual outcome is it goes to foreclosure sale. Not saying that's gonna happen, just saying that I've seen many many similar situations with that outcome. When they call me for help (Like a loan mod), I have to tell them unfortunately that I'm out of options. Hopefully the job situation will change for the better and hopefully everything will work out. I'm rooting for you.
  14. So you don't have a job but you can get a car loan? If you get a loan (somehow) and then apply for another mod, the payment will be based on your front end debt ratio but...your back end ratios will take the car into consideration and could throw you out of any mod. That's assuming they'll consider you anyway.
  15. Mods are not all "in house". There are still GSE mods available even if they are not a "HAMP" mod. That said, if you already have one, chances are reduced greatly at getting another one. You can get to a point where the lender/servicer considers any modification, "Excessive Forbearance" basically meaning, short of paying you to stay there, anything they do for you is just going to prolong the inevitable, default. Can't hurt to ask for another one as your financial situation has changed. All they can do is say no.
  16. Agreed with CV. Also, disputing it will simply be an exercise in typing skills and wasted time, as there is nothing in reality for you to dispute. As long as that loan exists, it's modified. As long as it's a modified loan, the creditor will report it as such and is required to under the servicing agreement with CDIA.
  17. How could/would it negatively impact you or be used against you? Are you currently making your payments? That would be the only thing I can see used against you, your credit impact on non payment. If you are making your payments BUT are asking if any assistance may be available to you, that's normal and their response is normal. Disaster relief assistance comes in many forms and lower payments and/or a forbearance may be an option. USUALLY, not always but usually, if you start making payments less than contractual amount due, you could subject yourself to credit harm. Even if you get into a loan modification, until it's permanent (unless), if its less than contractual, it could impact your credit. Disaster relief is pretty normal for the GSE type loans (Fannie/Freddie/VA/USDA/FHA, etc.). They look at your zipcode/county. They look to see if you are impacted financially due to the disaster (employment not available or reduced due to disaster). They look to see if the property is impacted (Damaged/destroyed). They look to see if you have adequate insurance for the damaged/destroyed property. Ditech used to be GMAC. They got into a LOT of trouble back before/during/after the crash of 08'. They are highly regulated and monitored and subject to administration by the CFPB for their practices/procedures so, let's just say in the one in a million chance someone's out to get you, the CFPB will come down on them hard.
  18. probably wasn't any equity to speak of after foreclosure fees and costs. You said you owed 149 and the home sold for 170, then you said you owed 135? Anyway, if there was no deficiency, there is no 1099. No one but the lender knows why it wasn't reported to the bureaus. I'd call it a day and move on.
  19. Well the idea is that they won't spend thousand to defend the ability to try to keep a tradeline on our reports another year or so. That tactic is pretty successful in my experience, albeit usually with collections than with OCs. I'm wagering on the fact they're not going to put all that much time into the matter, since it is written off and theres no more money to be made on the account anyway. How old? I think we settled sometime in 2012. That could leave another couple years for it to report. As far as the pre settlement vs. post settlement, they are verifying with the CRAs so they are actively communicating with the 3rd party post agreement. timeline starts with the dofd, not the dold. I think it's a waste of your time and money but again, won't hurt to throw the letter in the mail. There is no incentive for them to change anything until or unless you sue. We get "Here ye, here ye, common law, and a whole bunch of other Latin words" in letters daily threatening us if we don't remove a tradeline because...and we don't do anything unless our reporting is incorrect... until it comes from an attorney. THEN we just send the letter to OUR attorney and let them respond to their attorney. I'd be curious what your settlement agreement defines as a 3rd party. Yea I know when the timeline starts. Actually I've had a ridiculous amount of success with tradelines being removed with just a threat of litigation and never any papers from a lawyer. Are you a collector? I mean you're spreading info that I can personally verify as very false so... I just cleaned somebody's credit with zero letters from lawyers. I've been doing this for awhile... As far as bothering your company's attorney with every paper that comes through threatening litigation on an account that has no balance or reason to be verified, I'm going to call BS. The billable hours would rack up at exponential rate. I know if the CRAs flinch at the word litigation, and I'm betting you guys do too. I'm willing to bet you don't verify with the CRAs after you get a letter like that. Trust me, this is experience talking. LOL...I'm spreading info that is false? I've dealt with those like you for 25 years as an original creditor, which means that I'm also a collector. You may be getting lucky but I'm confident its luck and not skill or statute on your side. I have no doubt that some of your tactics have worked but again, you've been lucky. You take your path, I'll continue on mine. You also apparently don't read too well. I never said anything about not bothering to verify. I'm done with this topic as it's turned from helping people and providing opinions and advice to you wanting to flex your brain muscles and your ego. You go ahead and toot your horn about how smart you are and about how dumb lenders and creditors are and how scared they are with all of your big letters and words. Readers of your diatribes will form their own opinions and draw their own conclusions.
  20. Well the idea is that they won't spend thousand to defend the ability to try to keep a tradeline on our reports another year or so. That tactic is pretty successful in my experience, albeit usually with collections than with OCs. I'm wagering on the fact they're not going to put all that much time into the matter, since it is written off and theres no more money to be made on the account anyway. How old? I think we settled sometime in 2012. That could leave another couple years for it to report. As far as the pre settlement vs. post settlement, they are verifying with the CRAs so they are actively communicating with the 3rd party post agreement. timeline starts with the dofd, not the dold. I think it's a waste of your time and money but again, won't hurt to throw the letter in the mail. There is no incentive for them to change anything until or unless you sue. We get "Here ye, here ye, common law, and a whole bunch of other Latin words" in letters daily threatening us if we don't remove a tradeline because...and we don't do anything unless our reporting is incorrect... until it comes from an attorney. THEN we just send the letter to OUR attorney and let them respond to their attorney. I'd be curious what your settlement agreement defines as a 3rd party.
  21. Well...there are a lot of big juicy words in there. Did your settlement agreement mention anything specific about credit reporting? All of mine do. Your gonna spend thousands to argue on the definition of "3rd party" and then thousands more on the timing of reporting. Did they report after the settlement or before and during? If you have the thousands, I say go for it as written! If you are just throwing the letter out there with no intent to actually retain counsel and sue? Well, still, go for it. Can't hurt right? I'd be sure that your definition of 3rd party matches the definition in the settlement agreement and I'd be really sure there is a definition in the settlement agreement. I'd be really sure you are talking about the same timeline they think you are talking about. (Again...reporting pre settlement versus post settlement). You said "Old"? How old? meaning, are you gonna file suit when the tradeline might fall off your credit completely soon?
  22. Not sure there was a question here but...well...that happens often sadly. until you are permanently modified you are not paying per contractual agreement and most if not all lenders include language on trial mods stating that your credit could be impacted negatively. So, they'll tell you they told you. The other downside is that while your credit score went down, the other creditors got nervous and capped or closed your accounts, exacerbating an already bad situation. It's common unfortunately but, it's not permanent. Get your permanent mod then rebuild over time. That's all you can do really.
  23. Quite possibly. While the mortgage forgiveness act expired, you may be able to grandfather use of it considering you have not filed your taxes and, if not, you may be eligible for the "insolvency" worksheet with the IRS.
  24. Agreed... Sounds like a 3rd party offering to "help" them get a mod? If that's the case, depending on the state, it might be illegal to charge for a mod. It might require state licensing also.

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines